Blog · Signup & onboarding
Why Users Won't Sign Up: Fixing the 49% Risk Perception Leak
Users drop off when they can't see what they are committing to. Learn how to surface trust signals near your CTA and fix the risk perception leak.
Users abandon signups when a page fails to state the commitment level. In Leakly audits of 959 websites, 49% had the leak "The commitment being asked for is not stated" (TRUST_RISK_001). When visitors cannot determine what happens after they click, they leave rather than guess.
This matters because every unanswered question about commitment acts as friction. For SaaS founders and ecommerce owners, fixing this single risk perception leak often recovers conversions that were otherwise lost to hesitation. The solution does not require redesigning your product; it requires changing the copy immediately surrounding your conversion controls.
Why do users hesitate at the signup button?
Hesitation is rarely about the value proposition itself. It is about the unknown cost of finding out if the value proposition is true. A visitor looking at a "Get Started" button is running a quick mental calculation: What will this ask of me? Will I be charged? Can I stop if I do not like it? Will I have to talk to sales?
When the interface provides no answers, the safest action is inaction. This is especially true on mobile, where interruptions are frequent and screen space limits how much context a user can hold in their working memory. If the commitment is ambiguous, the cognitive load shifts from evaluating your offer to defending against a potential trap.
In ecommerce, the stakes are measurable. Research aggregating 50 studies calculates an average documented cart abandonment rate of 70.22% [1]. While many abandonments stem from window shopping or price comparison, a significant portion occurs because the checkout process introduces unexpected demands or complexity right at the point of decision.
How common is the missing commitment leak?
It is one of the most frequent structural issues found across sites. In Leakly audits of 959 different websites, 49% triggered the rule for an unstated commitment. This makes it more prevalent than leaks related to visual hierarchy (58% for actions that do not look primary) or unclear calls to action (59% for CTAs that do not say what happens next).
A common pattern is burying the terms. The homepage might mention a free trial in the third paragraph, but the pricing page—the actual point of decision—only shows a button labeled "Subscribe." Another pattern is assuming the user remembers. You explained the billing cycle on the features page, but by the time the user reaches the checkout form, that information is gone.
If you want to see how this leak presents visually, reviewing a sample Leakly audit shows exactly how the software flags the distance between the CTA and the nearest trust signal.
Where should trust signals go relative to the CTA?
Trust signals must live in the immediate visual field of the conversion action. If a user has to scroll, pan, or search to find out whether a credit card is required, the signal has failed its purpose.
For SaaS products offering a free trial, the standard practice is placing "No credit card required" directly beneath the primary button. For subscription services, "Cancel anytime" or "Billed monthly, pause whenever" serves the same function. These are not marketing slogans; they are operational facts that remove specific objections.
Consider the relationship between this leak and others. If your primary call to action does not say what happens next, adding a commitment statement partially solves the problem by defining the boundaries of the action. However, the best approach combines a descriptive button label (e.g., "Start 14-day free trial") with a sub-text reassurance (e.g., "No credit card needed").
You should also evaluate your pages against the broader SaaS conversion audit checklist to ensure these signals are consistent across every entry point, not just the main landing page.
Does form length increase risk perception?
Yes. The number of inputs a user must manage directly correlates with how risky or burdensome the signup feels. Research indicates that the total number of form fields impacts overall usability far more than the number of distinct steps in a workflow [2]. The average checkout flow contains 11.3 form fields, and 17% of users have abandoned specifically due to checkout complexity [2].
Every additional field is a new demand. Asking for a phone number when you only need an email address signals that the user is committing to more contact than they anticipated. Asking for a company size before they have seen the product implies a qualification gate.
To reduce this friction without losing lead quality, focus on how to reduce signup friction by deferring non-essential fields to post-signup onboarding. Only request what is strictly necessary to deliver the first unit of value.
| Signal Type | Example Copy | Placement |
|---|---|---|
| Financial Reassurance | No credit card required | Directly below CTA button |
| Temporal Reassurance | Cancel anytime | Below CTA or inside button |
| Effort Reassurance | Takes 30 seconds | Above or beside CTA |
| Privacy Reassurance | We never share your data | Near email input field |
Match the signal type to the specific objection your audience holds at the point of conversion.
How do you mark required fields without causing anxiety?
Ambiguity around which fields are mandatory forces users to guess, and guessing feels risky. Designers sometimes attempt to reduce visual clutter by placing a single instruction at the top of the form stating all fields are required, or by only marking optional fields [3].
This approach fails because people do not read instructions at the top of forms [3]. Even if they read them, they forget them, particularly if the form is long or if they are interrupted on a mobile device [3]. Forcing users to scan the entire form to deduce which fields are mandatory increases interaction cost and makes the process feel tedious [3].
The solution is to mark every single required field explicitly. Using an asterisk is a widely understood convention that improves usability [3]. Be transparent about what you need and why you need it. If a field is truly optional, label it as such, but do not make the user hunt for the exceptions to an unstated rule.
1. Audit the conversion path.
Run an automated check or manually walk through the exact path a new visitor takes to convert. Note every page where a user must take an action (click, type, submit) and record whether the commitment level is explicitly stated on that specific screen.
2. Identify the dominant objection.
Determine what your users are most afraid of. For a freemium SaaS, it is usually hidden paywalls. For an ecommerce site, it is often forced account creation or unexpected shipping costs. Look at support tickets or exit surveys if available.
3. Write the commitment statement.
Draft a short phrase (under six words) that directly negates the dominant objection. Avoid vague language like "Risk-free." Use concrete operational facts like "No credit card," "Free returns," or "Unsubscribe in one click."
4. Place the statement in the visual anchor.
Position this text immediately adjacent to the primary conversion control. On desktop, this is typically centered directly below the button. On mobile, ensure it remains visible without scrolling once the button is in view. Review how pricing page conversion leaks often stem from separating the price from the terms.
5. Test the contrast and hierarchy.
The reassurance text should be legible but subordinate to the CTA. If your conversion text does not meet contrast minimums, the reassurance becomes invisible. Use a slightly smaller font size or a secondary text color that still passes accessibility standards.
What else compounds the fear of signing up?
Risk perception does not exist in isolation. It compounds with other usability failures. If your page is heavy enough to delay the offer—a leak found in 71% of audited sites—the user's patience depletes before they even reach the CTA. Slow load times implicitly signal a lack of care, which raises doubts about the product itself.
Similarly, if the page never says who it is for (a leak present in 46% of sites), the user is already uncertain about whether the product fits their needs. Adding a commitment statement to a page with an undefined audience helps, but it cannot carry the weight of a missing value proposition that names the outcome.
Think of the signup experience as a sequence of proofs. The first screen must prove relevance. The middle of the page must prove capability. The final step must prove safety. Missing any one of these causes the subsequent steps to fail. You can use a free AI conversion audit to identify which specific proof is missing from your current flow.
What to do first
Do not start by rewriting your entire landing page. Start at the bottom of the funnel, exactly where the user clicks. Go to your primary signup or checkout page right now. Look at the button. Is there a sentence within two inches of that button that tells the user exactly what they are not committing to? If not, write one based on your actual billing or account policies, and place it directly under the button today. That single addition addresses the most common trust failure found across hundreds of sites, and it requires no engineering work to deploy.
Frequently asked questions
What is a risk perception leak?
A risk perception leak occurs when a website asks a user to convert without clearly stating the commitment level involved. If a visitor cannot immediately tell whether they will be charged, locked into a contract, or spammed, they perceive high risk and abandon the action rather than proceed blindly.
Where is the best place to put 'no credit card required'?
Place it directly beneath the primary call-to-action button. It must be within the user's immediate visual field when they are deciding whether to click. Putting it in the footer, a FAQ section, or above the fold while the button is below the fold separates the reassurance from the action.
Does reducing form fields actually improve signup rates?
Yes. Research shows that the total number of form fields impacts usability far more than the number of checkout steps. Each additional field increases perceived effort and gives the user another reason to reconsider. Removing non-essential fields lowers the barrier to entry.
Should I mark optional fields or required fields on my signup form?
You should explicitly mark every required field, typically using an asterisk. Placing a general instruction at the top of the form fails because users do not read top-of-form instructions. Marking only optional fields forces users to scan the entire form to deduce the rules, increasing cognitive load.
How do I know if my CTA is causing hesitation?
Review whether your button text describes the exact action that follows the click. Generic labels like 'Submit' or 'Continue' create ambiguity. Pair a specific button label with a commitment statement directly below it to eliminate doubt about what happens next.
Sources
- 1.Baymard Institute, Cart & checkout abandonment rate statistics. baymard.com/lists/cart-abandonment-rate
- 2.Baymard Institute, Checkout optimization: 5 ways to minimize form fields in checkout (2024). baymard.com/blog/checkout-flow-average-form-fields
- 3.Nielsen Norman Group, Marking required fields in forms. nngroup.com/articles/required-fields
Drafted with AI from the sources above, then checked against them before publication. Figures attributed to Leakly come from aggregated, anonymous audit data.
Written by
Michael Thorne
Editor, Leakly
Michael Thorne edits Leakly’s guides and blog. Every guide is checked against the Leak library before it is published, and every figure is linked to its source.
All guides by Michael Thorne
